I went to Torq Speedlab this morning (video is uploading now) for a new baseline on Roxy. The graph is raw data. SAE correction factor was 1.03. The pull was done on a Mustang Dyno (eddy current type add 30 HP correction). I've "done the math" and marked the sheet with corrected values.

I do have an anomaly or two to discuss with Vince though. First would be the power drop at 5800 RPM. Second, we used a wideband O2 sensor and got an AFR that was pretty rich (around 10.46/1) even for the DI V6. This tune is supposed to be the latest one from Vince tweaked from my run log.

I logged the runs with my Palmer software and reviewed them for problems but haven't found any indication of an issue from them. Unfortunately, timing is one of the PIDs that this logger won't see on the Bosch chip so, though I think the drop can be attributed to the ECU pulling timing, I can't be absolutely sure. At the point the HP dropped, the IAT was passing up through 124 F.

Has anyone logged the knock sensors or IAT? Can you confirm for me what parameters initiate the timing pulls ?

My setup is an Airaid V2, MRT V1, and Trifecta's latest tune. I do have ducted air to the box but it is not sealed up yet. That's going to be tested the next time I dyno to see if it gets any ram effect once I seal it up better. It's pretty apparent that the box was sucking hot air by the IATs I logged during the run. Temps started around 99F for this run and peaked at 140 F.

Here's the run sheet...

Here's my original dyno run in 2009. This was also an eddy current type dyno. This graph does not have SAE correction. The corrected HP was around 321. Corrected torque was about 318.

The difference since then (besides 17K more miles) is I had the Airaid V1 and the initial Trifecta tune.

Here's another graph of the same pull with AFR. This dyno's AFR was out of calibration buy .4 so, add .4 at all points on the graph for comparison.

I just checked out your log and your IAT was at 140* max and your coolant temp at max 212* the drop in the graph almost look like the timing might of been pulled.

Why didnt you log your fuel trim and timing? I know in scanxl you cant log knock retard but you can def log timing.

Also, after 1.03 calculation from your run comes out to 233hp. I am not sure how dyno dynamic operate but the numbers even after correction look really low. I think with your mods you should be somewhere in the 260's range.

I think your high IAT was the kill point today with high temp. plus if your AFR was in the 10's I think that might be a little too rich. Im on e85 and stay around 1.250 and richer EQ ratio(high 10's to 11's in AFR).

I went to Torq Speedlab this morning (video is uploading now) for a new baseline on Roxy. The graph is raw data. SAE correction factor was 1.03. The pull was done on a Mustang Dyno (eddy current type add 30 HP correction). I've "done the math" and marked the sheet with corrected values.

A couple of friendly observations:

The graph indicates the numbers on the dyno are already corrected for SAE conditions (that's what "WC" means). You don't have to apply the factor again.

Where are you getting the 30 HP correction? A properly-calibrated Mustang dyno doesn't need to have arbitrary numbers added. The values are directly calculated from strain gauge data, and unless the strain gauge is out of calibration, there should never be a need to add arbitrary corrections. Mustang dynos should be calibrated ("zeroed") before every series of runs. In addition, these dynos need to be "zeroed" and "spanned" with a calibrated weight every few hours of operation.

Why are you translating numbers back to the flywheel? Unless you do a wheels-up coast-down test on the dyno your running on (and I don't recommend you do), the 20% figure is just a shot in the dark.

Instead of introducing a lot of random error to your numbers, stick with the same dyno, and stop trying to build the numbers up to some "ideal" value. You'll never be able to figure out true gains if you do; you'll just keep chasing after numbers.

You're running extremely rich. You should be in high 11's/low 12's. You're leaving a lot of power "on the table" running that rich.

I just checked out your log and your IAT was at 140* max and your coolant temp at max 212* the drop in the graph almost look like the timing might of been pulled.

Why didnt you log your fuel trim and timing? I know in scanxl you cant log knock retard but you can def log timing.

Also, after 1.03 calculation from your run comes out to 233hp. I am not sure how dyno dynamic operate but the numbers even after correction look really low. I think with your mods you should be somewhere in the 260's range.

I think your high IAT was the kill point today with high temp. plus if your AFR was in the 10's I think that might be a little too rich. Im on e85 and stay around 1.250 and richer EQ ratio(high 10's to 11's in AFR).

HP was 237 x 1.03 is 244... 274 in "dynojet years" lol! The lower graph was an old one from 2009.. not today's.

Yea, I'm a bit concerned about the AFR... Vince did say he made some changes based on what he's learned about the LLT in this latest tune... it does make hay for what I have.

The Palmer thing has me stumped though. I should be able to (and have in the past) gotten LTFT and STFT but never gotten timing. I am using the older program "PCMSCAN" and not "SCANXL" which is probably the difference. Problem is, I'm kinda pissed at Palmer for never returning multiple E-mails asking about a compatible program or add on for the Bosch ECU. If I spend any money for new software it won't be with them!

The graph indicates the numbers on the dyno are already corrected for SAE conditions (that's what "WC" means). You don't have to apply the factor again.

Where are you getting the 30 HP correction? A properly-calibrated Mustang dyno doesn't need to have arbitrary numbers added. The values are directly calculated from strain gauge data, and unless the strain gauge is out of calibration, there should never be a need to add arbitrary corrections. Mustang dynos should be calibrated ("zeroed") before every series of runs. In addition, these dynos need to be "zeroed" and "spanned" with a calibrated weight every few hours of operation.

Why are you translating numbers back to the flywheel? Unless you do a wheels-up coast-down test on the dyno your running on (and I don't recommend you do), the 20% figure is just a shot in the dark.

Instead of introducing a lot of random error to your numbers, stick with the same dyno, and stop trying to build the numbers up to some "ideal" value. You'll never be able to figure out true gains if you do; you'll just keep chasing after numbers.

You're running extremely rich. You should be in high 11's/low 12's. You're leaving a lot of power "on the table" running that rich.

OK... my bad on the WC I missed the correction. He didn't put it on my friends S2000 we ran before mine so I assumed.

I add 30 HP to get a Dynojet equivalent. All eddy current dynos calculate HP from the torque numbers... EC type use a different formula. When comparing readings from different types.. it's a ballpark number. I am aware that numbers from different dynos are "apples and oranges" I reference that number for discussion only! Invaribly you will get a member asking "why is that number so much lower than my dynojet number"! That's why...

As to the AFR... the DI likes a richer mixture.. maybe not quite that rich though. It is a new tune from the only guy doing V6s. If you can do better... we'd welcome your efforts.

The graph indicates the numbers on the dyno are already corrected for SAE conditions (that's what "WC" means). You don't have to apply the factor again.

Where are you getting the 30 HP correction? A properly-calibrated Mustang dyno doesn't need to have arbitrary numbers added. The values are directly calculated from strain gauge data, and unless the strain gauge is out of calibration, there should never be a need to add arbitrary corrections. Mustang dynos should be calibrated ("zeroed") before every series of runs. In addition, these dynos need to be "zeroed" and "spanned" with a calibrated weight every few hours of operation.

Why are you translating numbers back to the flywheel? Unless you do a wheels-up coast-down test on the dyno your running on (and I don't recommend you do), the 20% figure is just a shot in the dark.

Instead of introducing a lot of random error to your numbers, stick with the same dyno, and stop trying to build the numbers up to some "ideal" value. You'll never be able to figure out true gains if you do; you'll just keep chasing after numbers.

You're running extremely rich. You should be in high 11's/low 12's. You're leaving a lot of power "on the table" running that rich.

One other thing... instead of coming on here and being critical... how about offering up a possible cause for the knock sensor pulling timing at 5800 RPM... then you would be contributing to the discussion.

One other thing... instead of coming on here and being critical... how about offering up a possible cause for the knock sensor pulling timing at 5800 RPM... then you would be contributing to the discussion.

Sure! Post some stock and tuned timing tables, let's see what the spark curve looks like. Or have your tuner pull a few degrees of timing at 5800 RPM (look at the logs for where in the table this falls w/r/t engine load) and see if that resolves the issue.

BTW, sorry you saw my comments as "being critical." I was just pointing out some information that might help you nail down the problem by nailing down your numbers first.

I just checked out your log and your IAT was at 140* max and your coolant temp at max 212* the drop in the graph almost look like the timing might of been pulled.

Why didnt you log your fuel trim and timing? I know in scanxl you cant log knock retard but you can def log timing.

Also, after 1.03 calculation from your run comes out to 233hp. I am not sure how dyno dynamic operate but the numbers even after correction look really low. I think with your mods you should be somewhere in the 260's range.

I think your high IAT was the kill point today with high temp. plus if your AFR was in the 10's I think that might be a little too rich. Im on e85 and stay around 1.250 and richer EQ ratio(high 10's to 11's in AFR).

IAT of 140* is definitely going to kill things! IIRC, you start pulling timing at like 88*...

Sure! Post some stock and tuned timing tables, let's see what the spark curve looks like. Or have your tuner pull a few degrees of timing at 5800 RPM (look at the logs for where in the table this falls w/r/t engine load) and see if that resolves the issue.

BTW, sorry you saw my comments as "being critical." I was just pointing out some information that might help you nail down the problem by nailing down your numbers first.

I only wish I could see the tables. The Trifecta tune logs are proprietary and not even "read only"! Vince ( the tuner ) takes our logs and tweaks based on that data. I'm hoping this dyno run with wideband O2 readings will be a bit more helpful.

For $2500 I can buy the necessary software license from him but, I don't tune cars (motorcycles yes in the past) for a living so that's too much.